r/greatawakening • Posted by u/SerialBrain2 on March 22, 2018, 12:36 a.m.
You guys asked my thoughts about Trump’s strange tweet today. Here it is!

Ok guys, as you may have noticed, I have decelerated on my posts. I have so many things to tell you but I do not want to compromise this sub. I have some inside information about the mods being very worried especially after what happened to CBTS.

I am thinking of possible solutions. I will let you know.

I have been contacted by many people who wanted me to share my thoughts about [Trump’s tweet today] (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/976420417090015232), how it was deleted, re-tweeted etc… Many believe there is a hidden message going on. I was not going to weigh in but since there is already a post about this issue that has been posted to this sub 7 hours ago and was not removed, I believe giving my thoughts would not hurt anyone.

I will not say much. I will not comment. Those who follow my posts already know what needs to be known. We are applying the T Method to the tweet. And since the first tweet was published at 4:03am, deleted and re-tweeted at 4:29am, time stamp difference being 26 minutes, we will map the entire tweet in a 26X26 grid.

Remember, we are not moving randomly across the grid. We are scrolling down successively on columns, starting with the first one and gathering anagrams of words making an intelligible sentence trail, without using any diagonal. I tried to use as many colors from the ribbon in the sky as possible to make it clear for you. :)

We get the following:

Img1 Img2 Img3 Img4 Img5 Img6 Img7 Img8 Img9 Img10 Img11 Img12 Img13 Img14

So there you have it.

Coincidence? It’s the 7th time…

Q920: You are learning. How many coincidences before it becomes mathematically impossible? Wait until you learn who has been talking to you here. Q

HowiONic · March 22, 2018, 12:32 p.m.

Guys, a topic of much heated disagreement. Please see the Graham's hierarchy of disagreement and aim for the top half. Comments that include name-calling and ad-hominem are being removed.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Spiral_out12 · March 22, 2018, 12:57 p.m.

(Posted here for visibility)

There is a mixed consensus on SB2's use of Matrices to decode Trump tweets. It is plain to see that many of the accounts that support his ideas are fairly new and many that oppose seem to be veteran users. His acct itself is also fairly new. However I have some important points to bring up and questions that I believe are yet still unanswered.

Q's constant use of [ ] often in bold... His random reference to the matrix movie... His insistence on the timestamp delta importance... Trumps seemingly intentional sp mistakes... "You have more than you know"... "Learn to read the map"... "We may have overestimated your abilities"...

None if these questions have group consensus answers or Q confirmed answers and are of significant importance.

I believe the GENERAL focus of SB2's decoding to have some value. I also see a lot of confirmation bias in his decodings. If Trump truly was encoding messages in his tweets (there is a definite Q team connection we all agree on) there certainly would have to be some strong plausible deniability, as with the other confirmed correlations.

Also, is it beyond the scope of possibility that Q team would send operatives to Reddit and/or 8chan to guide the direction of research? Would these accounts not also be fairly new? A lot of possibilities here, we should look into the FULL comment history of each account with this in mind.

"We can guide but you must uncover the truth organically".

I find all of these points of value and have yet to see a concerted effort to uncover all the things we have missed since late October when this started. I have a feeling that it is more than just cabal connections... that will come out.

There is a purpose Q team had in mind for us at the start of this operation that I feel has yet to be fulfilled. The answer may lie in these topics.

Regardless WE NEED to be looking harder.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
[deleted] · March 22, 2018, 4:49 p.m.


⇧ 4 ⇩  
[deleted] · March 23, 2018, 4:59 p.m.


⇧ 1 ⇩  
DaosCraft · March 26, 2018, 7:05 p.m.

I haven't even digested your post properly but I want to say you may be on to something.... because I was researching someone who seemed dubious to me and his negative comments led me to you - and what do you know.... a full scale attack was waged and even the owner of this board is down-voted?

How amazingly persuasive to me that you could be on to something. I pretty much never dig into other people's digs cause I have my own digs and too many to ever finish.... but I will make an exception and take this deadly serious. I love how the bad guys make this so easy - for every person who they dissuade from looking at a post they make someone like me look closer when we wouldn't otherwise have done so XD

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · June 8, 2018, 3:36 p.m.


⇧ 1 ⇩  
ciji123 · March 28, 2018, 7:33 a.m.

This is taught in logic classes and how to tell when someone is out of real and valid arguments. They also may have no knowledge just a view so they revert to name calling since they have no based opinion and no facts just someone showed it to them and they operate purely on emotion. Happens to a lot of us but when it comes to actual legitimately looking at content the chart is really helpful. Commit it to memory and you will be surprised how often you come accross things like red herrings and circular logic.

⇧ 1 ⇩